Sound of mystery attacks in Cuba released. It’s as obnoxious as you’d expect

I'm pretty certain that whatever this is, it's not an intentional attack, for the simple reason that there's no plausible motivation for an attack of this nature. That basic question -- what would be the point? -- seems to get overlooked in a lot of the discussion about this.

Some kind of listening device malfunctioning or with unintended side effects? OK maybe, I couldn't speak to the technical plausibility, but at least there's a plausible motive. There's no reason why even the most hostile government would go to great lengths to use a mysterious (and therefore probably valuable) technology to inflict strategically useless harm on some American diplomats in the most public, attention-grabbing way.

I fully agree it is disconcerting (and unprofessional) for this article to repeatedly use the [unnecessary] word "attack" while buried in the bottom paragraph it is clear that there is a lack of evidence justifying calling it an attack.

However there is a potential motivation. If someone is unhappy about the resumption of diplomatic activity between the US and Cuban this is a potential way to derail or at least slow that. It creates an excuse for one side or the other to claim "they aren't operating in good faith" or "we can't work on this because there is this safety problem" and generally sowing distrust. At the least it is creating logistical issues with work as the US is pulling out people, nominally for, and entirely likely for sound safety concerns.

This need not be an official policy. It could be a rogue actor within Cuban or US ranks that is VERY unhappy with this path. Or it could be a 3rd party, either private within either of these countries or another country entirely. There are some Cuban ex-pats, particularly older ones, in the US (mostly FL) that loath any moderation on stance towards Cuba. I don't know about Cuba but it's possible this is also the case there?

For countries; Russia, for example, may still care about trying to be a PITA here not wanting Cuba and the US to be talking to each other, or at the least making the US spend time and effort on Not-Russia. Or it could be someone in South America. For example [current] Venezuela government relies in part on Cuba to be a friend. Cuba becoming closer to the US (in relative terms, of course as this is really just "less adversarial") does put something of pressure on Venezuelan government.

I'm pretty certain that whatever this is, it's not an intentional attack, for the simple reason that there's no plausible motivation for an attack of this nature. That basic question -- what would be the point? -- seems to get overlooked in a lot of the discussion about this.

Some kind of listening device malfunctioning or with unintended side effects? OK maybe, I couldn't speak to the technical plausibility, but at least there's a plausible motive. There's no reason why even the most hostile government would go to great lengths to use a mysterious (and therefore probably valuable) technology to inflict strategically useless harm on some American diplomats in the most public, attention-grabbing way.

I fully agree it is disconcerting (and unprofessional) for this article to repeatedly use the [unnecessary] word "attack" while buried in the bottom paragraph it is clear that there is a lack of evidence justifying calling it an attack.

However there is a potential motivation. If someone is unhappy about the resumption of diplomatic activity between the US and Cuban this is a potential way to derail or at least slow that. It creates an excuse for one side or the other to claim "they aren't operating in good faith" or "we can't work on this because there is this safety problem" and generally sowing distrust. At the least it is creating logistical issues with work as the US is pulling out people, nominally for, and entirely likely for sound safety concerns.

This need not be an official policy. It could be a rogue actor within Cuban or US ranks that is VERY unhappy with this path.

The lack of a proper investigation is an official act. The only recording being reported was done on a smartphone, and the articles always mention that there may be sound at higher frequencies but that the microphone is not good enough to capture it. So why not get some professional gear with wide range? Install it in the locations that are reported to have repeated incidents and capture it. No, the officials in charge are not interested in a full investigation. They are interested in using this to an end.

I'm pretty certain that whatever this is, it's not an intentional attack, for the simple reason that there's no plausible motivation for an attack of this nature. That basic question -- what would be the point? -- seems to get overlooked in a lot of the discussion about this.

Some kind of listening device malfunctioning or with unintended side effects? OK maybe, I couldn't speak to the technical plausibility, but at least there's a plausible motive. There's no reason why even the most hostile government would go to great lengths to use a mysterious (and therefore probably valuable) technology to inflict strategically useless harm on some American diplomats in the most public, attention-grabbing way.

I fully agree it is disconcerting (and unprofessional) for this article to repeatedly use the [unnecessary] word "attack" while buried in the bottom paragraph it is clear that there is a lack of evidence justifying calling it an attack.

However there is a potential motivation. If someone is unhappy about the resumption of diplomatic activity between the US and Cuban this is a potential way to derail or at least slow that. It creates an excuse for one side or the other to claim "they aren't operating in good faith" or "we can't work on this because there is this safety problem" and generally sowing distrust. At the least it is creating logistical issues with work as the US is pulling out people, nominally for, and entirely likely for sound safety concerns.

This need not be an official policy. It could be a rogue actor within Cuban or US ranks that is VERY unhappy with this path.

The lack of a proper investigation is an official act. The only recording being reported was done on a smartphone, and the articles always mention that there may be sound at higher frequencies but that the microphone is not good enough to capture it. So why not get some professional gear with wide range? Install it in the locations that are reported to have repeated incidents and capture it. No, the officials in charge are not interested in a full investigation. They are interested in using this to an end.

FWIW, the Navy has brought in more sensitive equipment. So far, they haven't announced any results, though.

It really is sounding like the "sound" is the song of the red herring.

If it's not a maser then it would have to be done through conduction. I imagine it's possible to use the frame of a building like a tuning fork. Projecting and attenuating resonance fields depending on freaquencies, material specs and other factors. It would require something in contact with the building frame/foundation, most likely underground.

The fact is, experts in this field are pointing out that this kind of sound cannot possibly have this effect.

That is true. The open question is "Can something that results in this kind of sound have that effect?"

Or, the question no one involved seems to be asking: "Is the sound a red herring, completely unrelated to the reported maladies?"

Exactly. Some symptoms of this incident involve hearing problems and we've jumped to the conclusion that sound must be involved. But some of the most serious hearing problems can be caused by nerve damage. I've suffered total hearing loss in one ear – replaced by awful tinnitus – in the space of only 2 days and it's thought the cause was nerve damage by a virus. There was no sound involved and my other ear retained perfect hearing.

If there was an attack, it's most likely poisoning, i.e. something causing nerve damage. It would explain many of the other symptoms too.

The fact is, experts in this field are pointing out that this kind of sound cannot possibly have this effect.

That is true. The open question is "Can something that results in this kind of sound have that effect?"

Or, the question no one involved seems to be asking: "Is the sound a red herring, completely unrelated to the reported maladies?"

Exactly. Some symptoms of this incident involve hearing problems and we've jumped to the conclusion that sound must be involved. But some of the most serious hearing problems can be caused by nerve damage. I've suffered total hearing loss in one ear – replaced by awful tinnitus – in the space of only 2 days and it's thought the cause was nerve damage by a virus. There was no sound involved and my other ear retained perfect hearing.

If there was an attack, it's most likely poisoning, i.e. something causing nerve damage. It would explain many of the other symptoms too.

But you are dismissing the fact the field of effect could be entered and exited by people at the scene.

The fact is, experts in this field are pointing out that this kind of sound cannot possibly have this effect.

That is true. The open question is "Can something that results in this kind of sound have that effect?"

Or, the question no one involved seems to be asking: "Is the sound a red herring, completely unrelated to the reported maladies?"

Exactly. Some symptoms of this incident involve hearing problems and we've jumped to the conclusion that sound must be involved. But some of the most serious hearing problems can be caused by nerve damage. I've suffered total hearing loss in one ear – replaced by awful tinnitus – in the space of only 2 days and it's thought the cause was nerve damage by a virus. There was no sound involved and my other ear retained perfect hearing.

If there was an attack, it's most likely poisoning, i.e. something causing nerve damage. It would explain many of the other symptoms too.

But you are dismissing the fact the field of effect could be entered and exited by people at the scene.

You assume that the "field" has any relation to the symptoms. Not everyone heard a noise at all, some heard a different noise.

It seems to me that either the "sound field" isn't the cause, or the symptoms don't have a common cause (honestly my money is on "both of the above").

Or the Russians are beta testing a secret weapon (it's getting harder and harder to leave the rolleyes smiley out when writing that)

I'm pretty certain that whatever this is, it's not an intentional attack, for the simple reason that there's no plausible motivation for an attack of this nature. That basic question -- what would be the point? -- seems to get overlooked in a lot of the discussion about this.

Some kind of listening device malfunctioning or with unintended side effects? OK maybe, I couldn't speak to the technical plausibility, but at least there's a plausible motive. There's no reason why even the most hostile government would go to great lengths to use a mysterious (and therefore probably valuable) technology to inflict strategically useless harm on some American diplomats in the most public, attention-grabbing way.

I fully agree it is disconcerting (and unprofessional) for this article to repeatedly use the [unnecessary] word "attack" while buried in the bottom paragraph it is clear that there is a lack of evidence justifying calling it an attack.

However there is a potential motivation. If someone is unhappy about the resumption of diplomatic activity between the US and Cuban this is a potential way to derail or at least slow that. It creates an excuse for one side or the other to claim "they aren't operating in good faith" or "we can't work on this because there is this safety problem" and generally sowing distrust. At the least it is creating logistical issues with work as the US is pulling out people, nominally for, and entirely likely for sound safety concerns.

This need not be an official policy. It could be a rogue actor within Cuban or US ranks that is VERY unhappy with this path.

The lack of a proper investigation is an official act. The only recording being reported was done on a smartphone, and the articles always mention that there may be sound at higher frequencies but that the microphone is not good enough to capture it. So why not get some professional gear with wide range? Install it in the locations that are reported to have repeated incidents and capture it. No, the officials in charge are not interested in a full investigation. They are interested in using this to an end.

To be fair, if the spooks are doing an in-depth investigation it's probably largely classified at this point and so we aren't going to hear much about it. What the scope is, details on findings they have so far, etc.

The fact is, experts in this field are pointing out that this kind of sound cannot possibly have this effect.

That is true. The open question is "Can something that results in this kind of sound have that effect?"

Or, the question no one involved seems to be asking: "Is the sound a red herring, completely unrelated to the reported maladies?"

Exactly. Some symptoms of this incident involve hearing problems and we've jumped to the conclusion that sound must be involved. But some of the most serious hearing problems can be caused by nerve damage. I've suffered total hearing loss in one ear – replaced by awful tinnitus – in the space of only 2 days and it's thought the cause was nerve damage by a virus. There was no sound involved and my other ear retained perfect hearing.

If there was an attack, it's most likely poisoning, i.e. something causing nerve damage. It would explain many of the other symptoms too.

But you are dismissing the fact the field of effect could be entered and exited by people at the scene.

I suspect 'sound' has been latched onto as an explanation and other impressions have been built up around that idea, including a "field" of effect. Isn't it much more likely they were alike exposed to a neurotoxin at a similar time & place and therefore seemed to experience symptoms at a given location, e.g. at work?